No we dont. The earth can easily support billions more, only not at a western lifestyle. If we went back to all being farmers there is no problem and we would not boil the earth.
Making like 90% of all women sterile would be a better solution.
If anything living as we have in earth in the last 300 years would be the ideal way to possibly thicken up Mars atmosphere .. send the oil companies off to Mars!
The world isn't fucked. It's fine. It'll be better off without us.
The poor would suffer the worst in their little fantasy scenarios as well. Who do you think will have their populations controlled? The rich or the people who need government assistance to survive?
That's probably due to developing countries ultimately still consuming less than developed countries, per capita at least...Most developing countries don't contribute nearly as much twords climate change as the developed world does.
India is one of the few exceptions and that's probably due to there being a billion people there
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data
Part to play? Be real this entire problem is caused and largely continued by western countries and other MEDC. It's almost entirely your fault and your problem to fix.
Or at the very least help developing countries create a path to sustainability so they don't end up like us.
yea because children of men is the kind of future we need
Developing countries are using a lot of unsustainable or "dirty" energy because it's cheap and able to respond to their rapid expansion, much moreso than clean energy. I dont remember the source but I saw some interview from a western source of some official from South Asia where they effectively said, how dare you fuel your own economic growth on dirty energy then come lecture us for burning coal
The OG Thanos.
What the fuck am I reading?
Never. There isnt enough water, co2 or other resources(probably) on mars for a self sustaining colony. It would require tons and tons of resources which would be deleterious to planet earth. Thats not to mention entire lives being lived in corridors, where one mistake could lead to everyone dying.
“Wholesome”? This is your argument?
That worked really well for China.
Other than killing people how are you going to achieve that? Population is already below replacement levels in the West.
Your heart is too big and fluffy against what we might have to deal with.
Go ahead and be aghast, dad. I actually made a choice about this, I don't have kids, but I'm guessing you do. I'm not going to judge your choice on a moral plane, but neither will I let you judge mine. This equation isn't hard – either almost everyone dies, or we choose to limit ourselves, in both the means you mentioned (birth control, sex ed, legal abortion) as well as preemptive, moral decisions about life unborn. Not to mention the entire other dimension of quality of life for generations to come.
With Thanos being brought up I think we are talking deperate measures here, maybe a virus that makes every woman sterile after childbirth would be a compromise.
Embrace starvation, drought and massive political instability? People really got to start realizing that heat and sea level rise are only a couple of the issues we'll be dealing with.
Lol I missed the part where the Avengers were brought up but yeah I really don't think we should fear or deny chances to curb lucrative habits if it means helping the only planet we have.
Uh, I don't have children. I am not even married.
Yeah it did. Imagine how China would look today if they had 2 or 3 billion mouths to feed.
You do realize that the policy created a male to female imbalance of a catastrophic proportion.
boom.
China's situation, particularly how it respects boys vs girls, was the factor in that so ...i dunno, ideally there would be a lot less infanticide in more progressive countries.... but uh...
It's not the policy that created this, it's the Chinese believe that a girl is worth less than a boy.
Don't listen to this guy, this is how the handmaid's tale becomes a reality......
I can tell you what then, spend a shitload of money to reduce the CO2 output and plant as many trees as humanly possible.
And holy hell at the utter dismissal of why the policy was instated.
Nah let's rather control populations in poor countries (Which is also our fault they are poor.) so we the holy west can buy an iPhone each year and eat beef till we throw up.
Green jobs in energy and recycling would probably offset a lot of the job losses that result from regulation.
You're crazy.
People aren't even willing to pay taxes unless put under threat of imprisonment. People aren't willing to make the personal sacrifices necessary for a sustainable environment (on an individual or corporate level) without either massive incentives or threat of forces.
Alright, boys, you heard 'em. Snip snip!
Mos def, hopefuly such fields become a loooot more lucrative to people and governments in the future.
